How will the ATPL changes affect the industry?

[philaviate]

I’m confused- as I read it if your PPC is SIC on a 2 crew aircraft you would not receive any ATPL (annotated or not) so those employers you mentioned would have to drop the ATPL requirement all together not just accept the restricted one in order for those people to be eligible.

Correct me if I’m wrong?

Yes. 2 points.

A pilot who had to submit a PIC multi-IFR ride report less than 12 months old with their ATPL application under the old rules will still have to do so under the new rules to get an ATPL*annotated sticker. So whether that is single pilot 703 or a trip to a flight training school - nothing has changed except the *annotated.

And prospective employers will have to update their minimum hiring requirements to ATPL*annotated or they will fund the applicant pool cut in half.

You didn't need to do a PIC ride. A simple IPC was sufficient, from left or right seat.
So it's not the same.
Under the old process, today you'll get nothing at all.

And the reason why people are annoyed at this is that it doesn't even meet the ICAO standard they profess to care so much about. All it does it put another barrier to industry progression, and as highlighted, opens the door to "atpl shortage, bring in the immigrants" further beating the industry down.

[Big Pistons Forever]

CAR 421.34 (6)

6) Restricted Licence
(a) Where the applicant has not completed the skill test in an aeroplane required to be operated with a co-pilot as specified in subsection (9), the licence shall be issued with the remark, “Skill test does not meet ICAO requirements.”
(b) Where the applicant completes the skill test in an aeroplane required to be operated with a copilot as specified in subsection (9), upon request to the Minister the remark shall be removed from the licence.

The skill test is specified in para 5 of the CAR

5) Skill
(a) Within the 12 months preceding the date of application for the licence, an applicant shall demonstrate in flight or in a level C or D full flight simulator, and on the ground, familiarity with and the ability to successfully perform, as pilot-in-command of a multi-engine aeroplane (with no central thrust configuration) required to be operated with a co-pilot as defined in subsection (9), and fitted with instruments and equipment suitable for two crew IFR flight in controlled airspace:
(i) both normal and emergency flight procedures and manoeuvres appropriate to the aeroplane in which the flight test is conducted and to successfully execute all manoeuvres and procedures set forth in Division XIV for issue of a Group 1 instrument rating.

When conducted in an airplane there is no practical difference between an IPC and a Group 1 initial flight test. That flight test in a Seminole counts for the issue of the ATPL just like it did before the change. The difference is that the license now issued will have the note “Skill test does not meet ICAO requirements.” on it.

[scdriver]

I cannot even begin to understand how a 705 SIC ride will get you nothing but an IPC on a Seminole will. What a waste of time and money for anyone in that boat, which is myself included.

[ruffdeezy]

.

[philaviate]

705 SIC ride will give you a restricted ATPL, which is only restricted outside of Canada meaning you cannot Captain a 2 crew which means nothing cause you can't without a new PPC anyway

no it doesn't

viewtopic.php?p=1355045#p1355045

[ruffdeezy]

yes my mistake, they have to do a group 1 ipc

[Red_Comet]

You didn't need to do a PIC ride. A simple IPC was sufficient, from left or right seat.
So it's not the same.
Under the old process, today you'll get nothing at all.

And the reason why people are annoyed at this is that it doesn't even meet the ICAO standard they profess to care so much about. All it does it put another barrier to industry progression, and as highlighted, opens the door to "atpl shortage, bring in the immigrants" further beating the industry down.

This is the key point that I missed as well. Previous ATPL requirements were just a current Group 1 IPC in the past 12 months, which obviously could be performed in a Redbird. Now it has to be a IPC in a twin aircraft in which you are logged as PIC (or "acting" PIC), which makes it absurd for those airline/commercial FOs as right now there are not a lot of FTUs that can do this in a reasonable timeframe given weather/training backlog/etc.

Our federal government never misses a chance to make our lives more difficult.

[philaviate]

You didn't need to do a PIC ride. A simple IPC was sufficient, from left or right seat.
So it's not the same.
Under the old process, today you'll get nothing at all.

And the reason why people are annoyed at this is that it doesn't even meet the ICAO standard they profess to care so much about. All it does it put another barrier to industry progression, and as highlighted, opens the door to "atpl shortage, bring in the immigrants" further beating the industry down.

This is the key point that I missed as well. Previous ATPL requirements were just a current Group 1 IPC in the past 12 months, which obviously could be performed in a Redbird. Now it has to be a IPC in a twin aircraft in which you are logged as PIC (or "acting" PIC), which makes it absurd for those airline/commercial FOs as right now there are not a lot of FTUs that can do this in a reasonable timeframe given weather/training backlog/etc.

Our federal government never misses a chance to make our lives more difficult.

But even if you do that you still only get the restricted one as no FTU are two crew.
So it's created an impossible situation, especially as the retards at TC will likely take months to process the licence. So no airline is going to put you though a pic PPC and then wait 6 months for the lazy bureaucrats to stamp your book before you can actually do the job.

Keep clapping comrades.

[ruffdeezy]

ATPL skill test was never able to be done in a redbird or other FTD
IPC must be in an aircraft

For co-pilots, the PPC rule will change to allow a PIC PPC to obtain ATPL

[philaviate]

For co-pilots, the PPC rule will change to allow a PIC PPC to obtain ATPL

Says who? Why would companies pay for FO to do a pic ride which will give them the atpl which means they can leave the company?

[bobcaygeon]

For co-pilots, the PPC rule will change to allow a PIC PPC to obtain ATPL

Says who? Why would companies pay for FO to do a pic ride which will give them the atpl which means they can leave the company?

If they are due for their recurrent training anyway, the upgrade training and PPC is the right avenue anyway already if they are capable anyway.

[philaviate]

For co-pilots, the PPC rule will change to allow a PIC PPC to obtain ATPL

Says who? Why would companies pay for FO to do a pic ride which will give them the atpl which means they can leave the company?

If they are due for their recurrent training anyway, the upgrade training and PPC is the right avenue anyway already if they are capable anyway.

Says who? Lots of companies are much longer than 1-2 year upgrades.

Why would a company spend more on a pic PPC for an fo, when the only benefit is giving that FO a tool to potentially use to leave?

[digits_]

Says who? Why would companies pay for FO to do a pic ride which will give them the atpl which means they can leave the company?

If they are due for their recurrent training anyway, the upgrade training and PPC is the right avenue anyway already if they are capable anyway.

Says who? Lots of companies are much longer than 1-2 year upgrades.

Why would a company spend more on a pic PPC for an fo, when the only benefit is giving that FO a tool to potentially use to leave?

That's not the only benefit. Companies like to have a few captain candidates ready in case FOs leave. It's also a relatively cheap tool to reward FOs. 'stay with us and your second PPC renewal will be a PIC ride'. It's not uncommon, even today, to do this.

[philaviate]

If they are due for their recurrent training anyway, the upgrade training and PPC is the right avenue anyway already if they are capable anyway.

Says who? Lots of companies are much longer than 1-2 year upgrades.

Why would a company spend more on a pic PPC for an fo, when the only benefit is giving that FO a tool to potentially use to leave?

That's not the only benefit. Companies like to have a few captain candidates ready in case FOs leave. It's also a relatively cheap tool to reward FOs. 'stay with us and your second PPC renewal will be a PIC ride'. It's not uncommon, even today, to do this.

But lots of companies don't. And now there's even an incentive not to. If they don't do it, it's hard for FO to leave.

Also, like I said, lots of companies are years from FO to upgrade.

Let's be honest. TC screwed up and have created a problem that doesn't need to exist.

Two crew PPC for ATPL, sure. Stops the 172 circuit wonder 1501hr instructors getting it.
But the PIC requirement is wrong and doesn't even match ICAO.

[Me262]

Brilliant. According to the TC table posted in Flight Traning thread, the Jazz/Encore/Transat/Porter FO needs to go rent a Seminole to do a IPC so he can apply for the restricted ATPL

[philaviate]

Brilliant. According to the TC table posted in Flight Traning thread, the Jazz/Encore/Transat/Porter FO needs to go rent a Seminole to do a IPC so he can apply for the restricted ATPL

Worse than that. He needs to rent the plane with an instructor to get signed off as a current on it. Then the school might let them use it for the IPC.
Or they might just say the twin is too busy with their students, so get lost. That's pretty common.

[digits_]

Brilliant. According to the TC table posted in Flight Traning thread, the Jazz/Encore/Transat/Porter FO needs to go rent a Seminole to do a IPC so he can apply for the restricted ATPL

Worse than that. He needs to rent the plane with an instructor to get signed off as a current on it. Then the school might let them use it for the IPC.
Or they might just say the twin is too busy with their students, so get lost. That's pretty common.

Or wait until you upgrade at your current company or a new company?

Employers will soon catch on and I'm sure the ATPL requirements for hiring will change.

[philaviate]

Brilliant. According to the TC table posted in Flight Traning thread, the Jazz/Encore/Transat/Porter FO needs to go rent a Seminole to do a IPC so he can apply for the restricted ATPL

Worse than that. He needs to rent the plane with an instructor to get signed off as a current on it. Then the school might let them use it for the IPC.
Or they might just say the twin is too busy with their students, so get lost. That's pretty common.

Or wait until you upgrade at your current company or a new company?

Employers will soon catch on and I'm sure the ATPL requirements for hiring will change.

As has been repeated multiple times, it's not that simple.
Why would encore or whoever pay for a PIC IPC and then wait for the idiots at TC to spend unknown months processing the upgrade before their FO can actually upgrade?
Look at how poor TC are doing with processing anything. Now they've added another thing for them to drag their heels over.

People are having a hard enough time without extra burdens being placed by moronic bureaucrats who couldn't find the door of a plane never mind fly the damn thing. For those like you who just say "change company" or whatever, have you seen how bad it is for pilots to do that in Canada these days?

[digits_]

Worse than that. He needs to rent the plane with an instructor to get signed off as a current on it. Then the school might let them use it for the IPC.
Or they might just say the twin is too busy with their students, so get lost. That's pretty common.

Or wait until you upgrade at your current company or a new company?

Employers will soon catch on and I'm sure the ATPL requirements for hiring will change.

As has been repeated multiple times, it's not that simple.
Why would encore or whoever pay for a PIC IPC and then wait for the idiots at TC to spend unknown months processing the upgrade before their FO can actually upgrade?
Look at how poor TC are doing with processing anything. Now they've added another thing for them to drag their heels over.

People are having a hard enough time without extra burdens being placed by moronic bureaucrats who couldn't find the door of a plane never mind fly the damn thing. For those like you who just say "change company" or whatever, have you seen how bad it is for pilots to do that in Canada these days?

I'll limit my reply to respond to the statements I actually made.

First, I recommend you request access to this document: https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/licens ... nce-rating

It's also been uploaded to AvCanada in this post: viewtopic.php?p=1354476#p1354476


I quote, page 5 of that document, my emphasis

Although pilots have previously been able to obtain an ATPL without having done a PIC
skill test, Part VII regulations have long required that a PIC PPC be done prior to a pilot
acting as PIC in a certified two-crew aeroplane. Under the new standard, this is the skill
test that pilots will now be using to obtain the ATPL.

Regarding processing times, page 6 and next ones:

Early assessment of ATPL requirements – subpart 604/Part VII pilots
One effect of the PIC skill test requirement is that Subpart 604/Part VII First Officers
who do SIC PPCs may not be able to get the required ATPL skill test before their Captain
upgrade. Once they have finished their command course, they will have the PIC skill
test completed but they will still need to wait for Transport Canada to process their
ATPL application before they can act as Captain. To speed up processing time,
Transport Canada will allow ATPL applicants to submit for assessment the ATPL
requirements that they have already met, barring the skill test. This will allow the TC
service team to assess the logbook and other requirements in advance. The service
team will then send an email to the applicant informing them that they meet all ATPL
requirements except the skill test. Once the pilot completes the skill test, they must
email the service team as soon as possible informing TC that the skill test has
7
UNCLASSIFIED / NON CLASSIFIÉ
been completed. Transport Canada may already have a copy of the test on file.
Applicants should ask the ACP if the skill test is being submitted to Transport Canada
digitally. If it is, applicants do not need to send a copy. If the skill test is completed on a
paper form, the applicant should include a scanned copy of the test in their email.

Can it be an extra nuisance? Yes. Will there be extra costs? If you choose so, it's possible. Will it be the career ending change some make it out to be? I doubt it. Remember, all your peers are in the same situation.

The fact that TC publishes a document which addresses the main concerns, is at least a good sign.

[philaviate]

Or wait until you upgrade at your current company or a new company?

Employers will soon catch on and I'm sure the ATPL requirements for hiring will change.

As has been repeated multiple times, it's not that simple.
Why would encore or whoever pay for a PIC IPC and then wait for the idiots at TC to spend unknown months processing the upgrade before their FO can actually upgrade?
Look at how poor TC are doing with processing anything. Now they've added another thing for them to drag their heels over.

People are having a hard enough time without extra burdens being placed by moronic bureaucrats who couldn't find the door of a plane never mind fly the damn thing. For those like you who just say "change company" or whatever, have you seen how bad it is for pilots to do that in Canada these days?

I'll limit my reply to respond to the statements I actually made.

First, I recommend you request access to this document: https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/licens ... nce-rating

It's also been uploaded to AvCanada in this post: viewtopic.php?p=1354476#p1354476


I quote, page 5 of that document, my emphasis

Although pilots have previously been able to obtain an ATPL without having done a PIC
skill test, Part VII regulations have long required that a PIC PPC be done prior to a pilot
acting as PIC in a certified two-crew aeroplane. Under the new standard, this is the skill
test that pilots will now be using to obtain the ATPL.

Regarding processing times, page 6 and next ones:

Early assessment of ATPL requirements – subpart 604/Part VII pilots
One effect of the PIC skill test requirement is that Subpart 604/Part VII First Officers
who do SIC PPCs may not be able to get the required ATPL skill test before their Captain
upgrade. Once they have finished their command course, they will have the PIC skill
test completed but they will still need to wait for Transport Canada to process their
ATPL application before they can act as Captain. To speed up processing time,
Transport Canada will allow ATPL applicants to submit for assessment the ATPL
requirements that they have already met, barring the skill test. This will allow the TC
service team to assess the logbook and other requirements in advance. The service
team will then send an email to the applicant informing them that they meet all ATPL
requirements except the skill test. Once the pilot completes the skill test, they must
email the service team as soon as possible informing TC that the skill test has
7
UNCLASSIFIED / NON CLASSIFIÉ
been completed. Transport Canada may already have a copy of the test on file.
Applicants should ask the ACP if the skill test is being submitted to Transport Canada
digitally. If it is, applicants do not need to send a copy. If the skill test is completed on a
paper form, the applicant should include a scanned copy of the test in their email.

Can it be an extra nuisance? Yes. Will there be extra costs? If you choose so, it's possible. Will it be the career ending change some make it out to be? I doubt it. Remember, all your peers are in the same situation.

The fact that TC publishes a document which addresses the main concerns, is at least a good sign.

This isn't affecting me one bit. I'm comfortable in my left seat already.

But it doesn't mean I support more retardation from government making life hard for pilots.

TC can't even process a simple medical for many people in less than a year, I don't trust them to do this right either.
Even with their so called streamlined process it is an extra burden, and still doesn't meet ICAO standards. It also removes the ability for people to time their upgrades, because they'll have to hit 1500hrs. Submit the pre approval, then hope their company will time a ppc for them once that comes back, then wait again.

Let's be honest, it is simply more regulation and mistakes from an incompetent government agency that actively hurts the people they work for. The entire canadian federal government and all agencies need to remmeber they are public servants, not masters. This is just item 999999999 on the list of moronic things they keep doing.